Author Topic: When the fuel is gone (Read 1904 times)

SkyWolf · « **Reply #30 on:** September 02, 2005, 07:29:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DropW
We already have alternative fuel sources, but for some reason we aren't using them.

Not much to wonder about there.

Nilsen · « **Reply #31 on:** September 02, 2005, 07:34:31 AM »

Quote

Hydrogen is not a power source. You lose energy if you electrolyse hydrogen from water instead of just shoving the electricity directly into car batteries. What hydrogen does is allow you to store more energy in a tank in a car than you can store energy in a battery.

What all this means is that the energy landscape in the future will need to be diverse. [/B]

But Hydogen in cars are still better than batteries right? If you have access to lots of hydro electic power then it will be more effective to make hydrogen for cars etc than it is to use pure electric power as fuel... or am i wrong?

Ripsnort · « **Reply #32 on:** September 02, 2005, 07:37:31 AM »

lack of infrastructure is one of the primary reasons for other energy alternatives have not been embraced in large scale.

When we went from horse and buggy to gasoline transportation, it took decades, not months, to change the entire infrastructure of our country over.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #33 on:** September 02, 2005, 07:41:53 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nilsen
The burning of fossile fuels like oil raises the temperature. Water temperatures have risen and hurricanes forms if the water temp is above 27 degrees celcius.

Yes there has been natural hurricanes since.. well forever but the warmer the climate gets the more hurricanes we will get.

I'm not sure how you can be certain in your conclusion. Even scientists disagree whether or not it is contributing to hurricanes:

Quote

"The people who have a bias in favour of the argument that humans are making the globe warmer will push any data that suggests humans are making hurricanes worse, but it just isn't so ... These are natural cycles."
Source: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article309214.ece

To make a statement like you have is to simply follow the logic on one side of the issue only, without weighing in all the facts.

Personally, jury is still out for me, as I see no significant data proving one theory or another.

Staga · « **Reply #34 on:** September 02, 2005, 07:48:47 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DropW
Hey all. What about steam engines? I bet if scientists really put their minds to it they could create awesome steam engines with todays technology. Any ideas? -DropW

Well you'd have to boil water somehow and after high-pressure steam is used in steam engine it needs to be condensed back to liquid = wastes energy and needs plenty of area/space.
Best alternates for gasoline are alcohols, natural gas and hydrogen and all of those have better coefficient when used in ordinary Otto engines or fuel cells.
I see alcohols and natural gas best option for this day and close future and hydrogen used in either otto engines or in fuel cells in future.

Staga · « **Reply #35 on:** September 02, 2005, 07:51:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort

Personally, jury is still out for me, as I see no significant data proving one theory or another.

Say...
Someone is pointing your head with a shotgun and says he's not sure if the gun is loaded or not.
Do you really want to find it out in a hard way?

I wouldn't but guess that's just me.

Staga · « **Reply #36 on:** September 02, 2005, 08:07:46 AM »

Actually the shotgun is aimed to your childrens and their childrens; not against you.

Masherbrum · « **Reply #37 on:** September 02, 2005, 08:10:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Suave
It's got to be Hydrogen. I'm no chemist, but I do know that placing sodium in water although a volatile reaction, produces hydrogen gas. 70% of the earth is covered in salt water, doesn't seem like it should be that hard. But like I said I'm no chemist.

Hydrogen? Remember the Hindenburg!

Karaya

Ripsnort · « **Reply #38 on:** September 02, 2005, 08:24:27 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Staga
Say...
Someone is pointing your head with a shotgun and says he's not sure if the gun is loaded or not.
Do you really want to find it out in a hard way?

I wouldn't but guess that's just me.

So you'd rather just assume that anything told to you is the truth? Funny, alot of German people felt the same way when Goebbels spoke to them.

Sandman · « **Reply #39 on:** September 02, 2005, 09:56:58 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
lack of infrastructure is one of the primary reasons for other energy alternatives have not been embraced in large scale.

When we went from horse and buggy to gasoline transportation, it took decades, not months, to change the entire infrastructure of our country over.

Ripsnort speaketh trutheth.

Meatwad · « **Reply #40 on:** September 02, 2005, 10:31:39 AM »

IMO the future of fuel rests in hydrogen.

Staga · « **Reply #41 on:** September 02, 2005, 12:47:03 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
So you'd rather just assume that anything told to you is the truth? Funny, alot of German people felt the same way when Goebbels spoke to them.

I think you're grasping thin air Rip

Using your way of think we could also say GWB is like Goebbels in 1944; preaching how well everything goes and how final victory making road for 1000 year empire is already in sight.

And look what happened. Hell thanks for Bringing Goebbels into this; I bet we can have many nice comparisons between him and couple politicians

Anyways the beef in this case is YOU DO NOT KNOW if global warming is true or not (neither do I) but that's one thing I do not want to play with.

Cutting down pollution won't hurt anyone and it's like turning the shotgun barrels away from your own children IMHO.

Feel free to disagree and I'm sure you will

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #42 on:** September 02, 2005, 01:06:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nilsen
But Hydogen in cars are still better than batteries right? If you have access to lots of hydro electic power then it will be more effective to make hydrogen for cars etc than it is to use pure electric power as fuel... or am i wrong?

Hydrogen allows a more dense energy storage in a car. Better range, easier "recharge". So in that way it is better than battery electric cars.

My point was that hydrogen is not just out there for the gathering, it needs to be manufactured. It takes more energy to maufacture than you will get out of the final product. Hydrogen is not an energy source.

Coal you can dig up out of the ground for very little energy expended and shovel it into a fire box and get a tremendous amount of useful energy. It takes less energy to produce coal derived fuel than you get out of the final product. Coal is an energy source.

If you have some other source like hydopower or nuclear you could produce the hydrogen required, and that is fine. But the USA will need to replace the equivalent energy of the petroleum industry in nuclear (probably) and then some to go to a hydrogen economy.

Suave · « **Reply #43 on:** September 02, 2005, 01:46:11 PM »

How many hydrogen fuel stations are there in Iceland now? I know their buses run on hydrogen. There is a hydrogen fuel station in Tokyo, does tokyo have hydrogen fueled buses too ?

Siaf__csf · « **Reply #44 on:** September 02, 2005, 02:05:25 PM »

The englishmen were pioneering on alternative fuels.

Late 19th century they used mummies from egypt to fuel the heating furnaces (according to Mark Twain).

Also brown butcher paper was manufactured from them.

Alternative fuels will kick in with force immediately when the society feels its in their best interest to do so. Many many options.. You can create fuel from crops. From used frying fat. From manure. Even a small waste dump creates tons of methane every day - absolutely free energy evaporating in the air every day PLUS to the fact that methane is a greenhouse gas.

If governments wanted alternative energy, we'd have it today.